Is the stock market slide over?

mathjak107

Senior Member
The market doesn't seem to make a lot of sense right now. It's very fickle but is fascinating to watch.

While I do think there will be another big dip over the next few months, the fact that there is so much cash on the sidelines looking for some type of return will keep the market from going too low. Throw in future Fed action and foreign investors looking for a safer haven, and the market won't crash and burn.

There are a few reasons why I think there will be another dip. One is that some will be shocked when they see actual reports of no to low earnings. Knowing it's going to happen is one thing, but seeing it may be sobering. Another reason is because of companies cutting buybacks. Finally, many companies will slide into bankruptcy with some never re-emerging. Whether this will have a cascading effect remains to be seen.

Admittedly, I know nothing, and everything the market does is now a surprise. I think we are living in a fake economy with too low interest rates allowing/creating havoc, but since that is not expected to change for a very long time, we're stuck with an over-valued stock market. Until it's not.
in 1998 we had about 7500 stocks in the wilshire 5000 index ....today we have 3350 left ....we have more money then ever chasing less than half the stocks .....mergers , bankruptcies, private equity , have all removed half the market over the years
 

oldmontana

Member
Location
Montana
Original Poster
That is what is said about gold but facts show other wise .

gold has now beaten equities the year to date , over the one year , the 3 year . Gold has now beaten equities the Last 15 years and 20 year periods ...

old data going back to before gold was main stream and could be bought by anyone like a stock distorted golds use as an asset .....it was prior the asset choice for the doom and bloomers and gold bugs who liked shiny objects .

today one etf Gld holds 40 billion in gold in just one fund as golds popularity is far different the last 20 years .

the other power in gold is when it is rebalanced in a portfolio to buy other assets .... in times like now gold blew away a total bond fund and equities .....so compared to selling some of a total bond fund to rebalance and buy equities, gold buys a whole lot more equities being it is up 30% the last year.

people like to look at equities only in a bull at the top ...yet we spend 80% of our time somewhere between the last low and last high .....
https://www.macrotrends.net/1333/historical-gold-prices-100-year-chart

Not that great is it?
 

mathjak107

Senior Member
like I said forget the decades ago when it was a limited access investment for the gold bugs .in fact until 1975 it was banned from ownership for years ....different world just as our markets are different the last 20 years since high frequency trading representing 90% of all the days volume .

look at the last 20 years and the time frames up to now

gold has outperformed the us stock market

year to date

last year

the last 3 years

the last 15 years

the last 20 years

loooks good to me

once again you are trying to make a point that actual numbers show are very different from what you are trying to disprove
go right to portfolio visualizer , research it yourself...gold has beaten equities over most time frames the last 20 years .....

in fact long treasury bonds have beaten equites too for most of the last 20 years..

long term treasuries beat equities

year to date

the one year

3 year

just about Tied the five year

the long term treasuries beat equities again the last 20 years.

so once both halves of the cycles are included equities, don’t look to outstanding by themselves in two decades.

..we can alll cherry pick individual stocks but the Dow , s&p , wilshire and Total market is what is looked at when comparing assets .

equities have functioned better in a more diversified portfolio the last two decades
 

Last edited:

oldmontana

Member
Location
Montana
Original Poster
That is what is said about gold but facts show other wise .

gold has now beaten equities the year to date , over the one year , the 3 year . Gold has now beaten equities the Last 15 years and 20 year periods ...

old data going back to before gold was main stream and could be bought by anyone like a stock distorted golds use as an asset .....it was prior the asset choice for the doom and bloomers and gold bugs who liked shiny objects .

today one etf Gld holds 40 billion in gold in just one fund as golds popularity is far different the last 20 years .

the other power in gold is when it is rebalanced in a portfolio to buy other assets .... in times like now gold blew away a total bond fund and equities .....so compared to selling some of a total bond fund to rebalance and buy equities, gold buys a whole lot more equities being it is up 30% the last year.

people like to look at equities only in a bull at the top ...yet we spend 80% of our time somewhere between the last low and last high .....
Over the past 30 years, the price of gold has increased by around 280%.2 Over the same period, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) has gained 839%.1



If we look instead over the past 15 years, the price of gold has increased by 278%, roughly the same as the 30 year.2 Over the same period, the DJIA increased by only 173%.1

So, over the longer term, stocks seem to outperform gold by about 3-to-1, but over shorter time horizons, gold may win out. Indeed, if we go way back to the 1920s through today, stocks blow gold away.

Back to the question of this thread..
Is the stock market slide over?

Whats your thinking?
 

mathjak107

Senior Member
Look at the last two decades ...look at the time frames I posted ... I assume you can read .

Gold has beat equities the last Ytd , 1 yr ,3 yr , 15 ,20 years ...why do you keep telling me about 30 years ago , 100 years ago or why not 5000 years ago ..citizens could not even buy gold for investment from 1934 to 1975 in America . I would think you know it was fixed in a range from 26 bucks to 35 an ounce for 40 years .. IT DID NOT EVEN TRADE IN AMERICA....but then again the mere fact you tried to make a comparison tells me maybe not .

why in the world would you post a chart for 100 years .

you need to really look at the last two decades where gold actually became main stream ...I know you like to twist and skew data but it serves no purpose looking back any more than two decades to get a feel for it as a viable main stream investment ...it just tends to run longer cycles than equities but it certainly has held its own the last two decades.

it especially has added alpha to portfolios in down turns compared to holding total bond funds ....it buys way more equities in rebalancing for the next bull...so gold behaves very differently in a portfolio and rebalanced than sitting static as a lump ...but even as a lump it did well the last two decades beating equities over that time frame
 
Last edited:

oldmontana

Member
Location
Montana
Original Poster
Look at the last two decades ...look at the time frames I posted ... I assume you can read .

Gold has beat equities the last Ytd , 1 yr ,3 yr , 15 ,20 years ...why do you keep telling me about 30 years ago , 100 years ago or why not 5000 years ago ..citizens could not even buy gold for investment from 1934 to 1975 in America . I would think you know it was fixed in a range from 26 bucks to 35 an ounce for 40 years .. IT DID NOT EVEN TRADE IN AMERICA....but then again the mere fact you tried to make a comparison tells me maybe not .

why in the world would you post a chart for 100 years .

you need to really look at the last two decades where gold actually became main stream ...I know you like to twist and skew data but it serves no purpose looking back any more than two decades to get a feel for it as a viable main stream investment ...it just tends to run longer cycles than equities but it certainly has held its own the last two decades.

it especially has added alpha to portfolios in down turns compared to holding total bond funds ....it buys way more equities in rebalancing for the next bull...so gold behaves very differently in a portfolio and rebalanced than sitting static as a lump ...but even as a lump it did well the last two decades beating equities over that time frame
Over the past 30 years, the price of gold has increased by around 280%.2 Over the same period, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) has gained 839%.1

You talk about over the last year..OK. Come back in 2 years and see how gold compared to the DJIA..think ahead...use reason.

Buy gold, I will stick with dividend paying stocks. Gold does not pay dividends, unless you buy gold mining stocks.
 

mathjak107

Senior Member
Over the past 30 years, the price of gold has increased by around 280%.2 Over the same period, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) has gained 839%.1

You talk about over the last year..OK. Come back in 2 years and see how gold compared to the DJIA..think ahead...use reason.

Buy gold, I will stick with dividend paying stocks. Gold does not pay dividends, unless you buy gold mining stocks.
Who cares. First off no gold etfs even existed to trade it 30 years ago nor was it a main stream investment product .,,,,.second of all who cares about 30 years ago .


what matters most to us is the most action when we have the most dollars acted on .

.the size of your portfolio is a huge factor as to what time frame matters ...the greater the portfolio is as time goes on the bigger the effect returns have .... more recent market action has a very big effect on our portfolios since now is likely way higher than 30 years ago ...even 20 years ago any market action was on far far less dollars .

What counts the most for me is the last 15 years , since that is when our portfolio grew the most as real estate we owned was liquidated over the last 15 years ,with the last 3 years counting the most when our fuel tanks are full.

pulling time frames out of your butt is meaningless .....what counts is where your dollars fall out and what market action did and when.

if you don’t understand what I mean by the size vs the time frames matter you can read and learn ,although evidently you don’t bother , you just argue

https://www.kitces.com/blog/managing-portfolio-size-effect-with-bond-tent-in-retirement-red-zone/
 
Last edited:

fmdog44

Well-known Member
Location
Houston, Texas
That is what is said about gold but facts show other wise .

gold has now beaten equities the year to date , over the one year , the 3 year . Gold has now beaten equities the Last 15 years and 20 year periods ...

old data going back to before gold was main stream and could be bought by anyone like a stock distorted golds use as an asset .....it was prior the asset choice for the doom and bloomers and gold bugs who liked shiny objects .

today one etf Gld holds 40 billion in gold in just one fund as golds popularity is far different the last 20 years .

the other power in gold is when it is rebalanced in a portfolio to buy other assets .... in times like now gold blew away a total bond fund and equities .....so compared to selling some of a total bond fund to rebalance and buy equities, gold buys a whole lot more equities being it is up 30% the last year.

people like to look at equities only in a bull at the top ...yet we spend 80% of our time somewhere between the last low and last high .....
No one said it's value does not increase, only that it is viewed as a good safety valve against the stock market failing. You are comparing gold to equity averages and indexes, not individual stocks is not true of all stocks.
 

mathjak107

Senior Member
No one said it's value does not increase, only that it is viewed as a good safety valve against the stock market failing. You are comparing gold to equity averages and indexes, not individual stocks is not true of all stocks.
NOTHING WOULD EVER BE TRUE OF ALL STOCKS ... but all our personal returns work off of indivudual situation .. we all buy at different times , rebalance at different times , sell at different times and have different tax structures ...we can never speak in terms of any ones personal rate of return ..in fact the biggest factor is how much money of yours markets are working on at any point in time . a 5% move in a mediocre market today blows away a great market year 25-30 years ago for most of us in terms of dollars gained or lost .

all comparisons are always done off funds or assets as a group or index

even so i bet indexing beats 90% of small investors who buy individual stocks long term anyway
 
Last edited:

fmdog44

Well-known Member
Location
Houston, Texas
NOTHING WOULD EVER BE TRUE OF ALL STOCKS ... but all our personal returns work off of indivudual situation .. we all buy at different times , rebalance at different times , sell at different times and have different tax structures ...we can never speak in terms of any ones personal rate of return ..in fact the biggest factor is how much money of yours markets are working on at any point in time . a 5% move in a mediocre market today blows away a great market year 25-30 years ago for most of us in terms of dollars gained or lost .

all comparisons are always done off funds or assets as a group or index

even so i bet indexing beats 90% of small investors who buy individual stocks long term anyway
The single point of buying stocks is how well versed we are in selecting them.
 

mathjak107

Senior Member
The single point of buying stocks is how well versed we are in selecting them.
brokerages have teams of analysts who do nothing but select stocks , and try to estimate earnings ... with teams of people that do this full time , very few at the end of the day beat just indexing when all is said and done .....there are some great funds but for the most part most small investors suck at it long term .

miss one earnings report and years of gains can go away with individual stocks , or as well as you think one knows a stock you better know what the competitors have on their drawing board ....
\
even if you get it all right in your stocks , there will still be time frames other assets kick their butt .
 

oldmontana

Member
Location
Montana
Original Poster

mathjak107

Senior Member
Gold has always done well in times like we are in today....anyone that has watched gold would know that...no need to hear it from a expert is there?
Not just times we are in ..it has beaten the major indexes over almost all the time frames with only a handful of exceptions for two decades ......going back farther makes no sense since gold was not main stream nor available easily to the masses like stocks ..

With all the gold etfs it has traded for years now very differently ...plus you did not have all the all weather portfolios you do today that use gold as an asset class
 

oldmontana

Member
Location
Montana
Original Poster
The single point of buying stocks is how well versed we are in selecting them.
Right.

If one has average intelligence and does their home work will do well in the market....I have. I do subscribe to two publications and get tons of data form my brokerage firm but in the end I decide.
 

mathjak107

Senior Member
Right.

If one has average intelligence and does their home work will do well in the market....I have. I do subscribe to two publications and get tons of data form my brokerage firm but in the end I decide.
Average investors have not done well in individual stocks for a number of reasons ....you can find all kinds of data on this ....yes ,some can do well but average intelligence does not seem to mean much or add much to the equation ...the fact is that most small investors who buy individual stocks do not beat even the s& p over the long term
 

fmdog44

Well-known Member
Location
Houston, Texas
brokerages have teams of analysts who do nothing but select stocks , and try to estimate earnings ... with teams of people that do this full time , very few at the end of the day beat just indexing when all is said and done .....there are some great funds but for the most part most small investors suck at it long term .

miss one earnings report and years of gains can go away with individual stocks , or as well as you think one knows a stock you better know what the competitors have on their drawing board ....
\
even if you get it all right in your stocks , there will still be time frames other assets kick their butt .
Picking winners is like everything else, do your homework and you will be fine and there is no room for any counter remarks on that fact. Anyone in the money world that believes everything comes up roses is an idiot and needs to invest in a shoebox. Brokerages have a long term history of gains and losses. Some brokers are no more trained in analyzing companies than a parrot. "Do your homework."
 

oldmontana

Member
Location
Montana
Original Poster
Not just times we are in ..it has beaten the major indexes over almost all the time frames with only a handful of exceptions for two decades ......going back farther makes no sense since gold was not main stream nor available easily to the masses like stocks ..

With all the gold etfs it has traded for years now very differently ...plus you did not have all the all weather portfolios you do today that use gold as an asset class
Gold vs. Stocks and Bonds
When evaluating the performance of gold as an investment over the long term, it really depends on the time period being analyzed. For example, over a 30-year period, stocks and bonds have outperformed gold, and over a 15-year period, gold has outperformed stocks and bonds.1 2

Over the past 30 years, the price of gold has increased by around 280%.2 Over the same period, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) has gained 839%.1

If we look instead over the past 15 years, the price of gold has increased by 278%, roughly the same as the 30 year.2 Over the same period, the DJIA increased by only 173%.1

So, over the longer term, stocks seem to outperform gold by about 3-to-1, but over shorter time horizons, gold may win out. Indeed, if we go way back to the 1920s through today, stocks blow gold away.

Turning to bonds, the average annual rate of return on investment-grade corporate bonds going back to the 1920s is around 5.25%. That indicates that over the past 30 years, corporate bonds have returned around 450% - nearly double that of gold. Over a 15-year period the return on bonds and gold has been fairly comparable.

==========================================================

If a investor is looking for a steady return do not but gold as it does not pay a dividend. Stocks do. Bonds do.
 

fmdog44

Well-known Member
Location
Houston, Texas
Average investors have not done well in individual stocks for a number of reasons ....you can find all kinds of data on this ....yes ,some can do well but average intelligence does not seem to mean much or add much to the equation ...the fact is that most small investors who buy individual stocks do not beat even the s& p over the long term
One big reason rookie investors lose money is p-a-n-i-c.
 

fmdog44

Well-known Member
Location
Houston, Texas
Gold vs. Stocks and Bonds
When evaluating the performance of gold as an investment over the long term, it really depends on the time period being analyzed. For example, over a 30-year period, stocks and bonds have outperformed gold, and over a 15-year period, gold has outperformed stocks and bonds.1 2

Over the past 30 years, the price of gold has increased by around 280%.2 Over the same period, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) has gained 839%.1

If we look instead over the past 15 years, the price of gold has increased by 278%, roughly the same as the 30 year.2 Over the same period, the DJIA increased by only 173%.1

So, over the longer term, stocks seem to outperform gold by about 3-to-1, but over shorter time horizons, gold may win out. Indeed, if we go way back to the 1920s through today, stocks blow gold away.

Turning to bonds, the average annual rate of return on investment-grade corporate bonds going back to the 1920s is around 5.25%. That indicates that over the past 30 years, corporate bonds have returned around 450% - nearly double that of gold. Over a 15-year period the return on bonds and gold has been fairly comparable.

==========================================================

If a investor is looking for a steady return do not but gold as it does not pay a dividend. Stocks do. Bonds do.
Good points
 

mathjak107

Senior Member
The fact is gold has now beaten stocks over almost all time frames the last two decades ...it is only the last 20 years gold has become a main stream investment accessible through etfs ..

it is also when most of these all weather portfolios came about that use gold as an asset class ....prior to the last 20 years gold had little use in portfolios and was the asset of choice by doom and gloom era and gold bugs .


very different asset behavior than decades prior
 

oldmontana

Member
Location
Montana
Original Poster
Average investors have not done well in individual stocks for a number of reasons ....you can find all kinds of data on this ....yes ,some can do well but average intelligence does not seem to mean much or add much to the equation ...the fact is that most small investors who buy individual stocks do not beat even the s& p over the long term
You seem to be on this board 24/7. Good for you!

FYI...I am not an average investor. I have 60 years of investing, not that makes me a good investor. I have learned a lot over that time. made many mistakes...and have learned by my mistakes...so I can say I am not a average investor.

You seem to be bent on trying to put down everything I post. So be it!
 

mathjak107

Senior Member
You seem to be on this board 24/7. Good for you!

FYI...I am not an average investor. I have 60 years of investing, not that makes me a good investor. I have learned a lot over that time. made many mistakes...and have learned by my mistakes...so I can say I am not a average investor.

You seem to be bent on trying to put down everything I post. So be it!
Who cares about you ...this discussion is not about you ...it is about asset performance for one thing ....the other statement was the fact most small investors do not beat the s s&p in individual stocks ....that does not mean everyone nor does it mean you
 

mathjak107

Senior Member
You seem to be on this board 24/7. Good for you!

FYI...I am not an average investor. I have 60 years of investing, not that makes me a good investor. I have learned a lot over that time. made many mistakes...and have learned by my mistakes...so I can say I am not a average investor.

You seem to be bent on trying to put down everything I post. So be it!
no you have it backwards ..it is you trying to disprove what I post with either no facts , wrong facts, or you try to post things like a 100 year chart that have zero To do with anything I said.

believe me I do my homework ..I talk facts and figures and if the numbers show what I say there is nothing to argue but yet you do it anyway
 


Top